Evaluation of a Command-line Parser-based Order Entry Pathway for the Department of Veterans Affairs Electronic Patient Record

Design: The authors conducted a randomized evaluation of the new entry pathway, measuring time to complete a standard set of orders, and users’ satisfaction measured by questionnaire. A group of 16 physician volunteers from the staff of the Department of Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System–Seattle Division participated in the evaluation. Results: Thirteen of the 16 physicians (81%) were able to enter medical orders more quickly using the natural-language–based entry system than the standard graphical user interface that uses menus and dialogs (mean time spared, 16.06 ± 4.52 minutes; P = 0.029). Compared with the graphical user interface, the command-line–based pathway was perceived as easier to learn (P < 0.01), was considered easier to use and faster (P < 0.01), and was rated better overall (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Physicians found the command-line interface easier to learn and faster to use than the usual menu-driven system. The major advantage of the system is that it combines an intuitive graphical user interface with the power and speed of a natural-language analyzer. ■ J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2001;8:476–498. CHRISTIAN LOVIS, MD, MPH, MICHAEL K. CHAPKO, PHD, DIANE P. MARTIN, PHD, THOMAS H. PAYNE, MD, MPH, ROBERT H. BAUD, PHD, PATTY J. HOEY, RPH, STEPHAN D. FIHN, MD, MPH D ow naded rom http/academ ic.p.com jam ia/article-act/8/5/486/795933 by gest on 16 M arch 2019 to be cost-effective.8 Besides mitigating errors due to writing and transcription, electronic order entry can be used as a vehicle to provide comprehensive medical information and decision support.9–12 Electronic order entry is the fundamental framework for the embedded guidelines designed to support the decision process of health care providers.13 One of the major challenges in designing the electronic patient record is to meet the needs of detailed documentation while keeping the burden on directcare providers within an acceptable range. Tightly controlled and structured data entry can be a major burden for health care providers because of high costs in time.14–15 There have been many reports on how difficult it is to introduce electronic order entry systems. The well-known story about the OSCAR system at a Calgary hospital,16 which turned into a battle of physicians against machines, is not unique. Computerized order entry is known to take more time than handwritten order entry, especially for admitting orders.17 The evolution of computer interfaces that use a mouse, menus, forms, and dialog boxes has simplified the use of computers, especially for novices. Command-line–oriented systems, while difficult for novices, are very efficient for experienced users. High-speed, robust natural language processing techniques simplify use of command-line systems and permit their use by novices. Such techniques are especially important in academic settings where turnover among residents and other health care providers is high. In 1998, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS) was first released at a national level. The CPRS organizes and presents all relevant patient data to support clinical decision making. It allows clinicians to view and add patients’ data, make notes, and enter orders. It supports alerts, notifications, and guidelines. The CPRS became possible because of the extensive set of clinical and administrative applications in the Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture, VistA. The CPRS can be seen as a line of tightly integrated products that use open and distributed architectures and are able to support evolution and local adaptations. In a recent review of the implementation of the CPRS system at the VA Puget Sound Health Care System, one of the most common problems described by physicians was the time required to enter orders.18 The objective of the present project was to develop a simple and robust natural-language–based order entry pathway for an electronic patient record and determine its effects on order entry time and user satisfaction.

[1]  Christian Lovis,et al.  Full Text Multilingual Automatic Morphosemantems for Stand-Alone or Internet Based Applications , 1998, MedInfo.

[2]  Nicholas G. Tomaiuolo End-user perceptions of a graphical user interface for bibliographic searching: an exploratory study , 1996 .

[3]  Jonathan M. Teich,et al.  Research Paper: Identifying Adverse Drug Events: Development of a Computer-based Monitor and Comparison with Chart Review and Stimulated Voluntary Report , 1998, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[4]  D W Bates,et al.  Frequency, consequences and prevention of adverse drug events. , 1999, Journal of quality in clinical practice.

[5]  S L Beck,et al.  Use of the PDQ system in a clinical setting. , 1990, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

[6]  Christian Lovis,et al.  Medical dictionaries for patient encoding systems: a methodology , 1998, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[7]  L. Williams,et al.  Microchips versus stethoscopes: Calgary hospital, MDs face off over controversial computer system. , 1992, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[8]  L. Kohn,et al.  To Err Is Human : Building a Safer Health System , 2007 .

[9]  Géry d'Ydewalle,et al.  Graphical versus character-based word processors: an analysis of user performance , 1995, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[10]  D. Bates,et al.  Improving response to critical laboratory results with automation: results of a randomized controlled trial. , 1999, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[11]  D. Berwick,et al.  The truth about doctors' handwriting: a prospective study , 1996, BMJ.

[12]  A F Jerant,et al.  Applied medical informatics and computing skills of students, residents, and faculty. , 2000, Family medicine.

[13]  C. McDonald,et al.  Physician inpatient order writing on microcomputer workstations. Effects on resource utilization. , 1993, JAMA.

[14]  J M Teich,et al.  Impact of computerized physician order entry on physician time. , 1994, Proceedings. Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care.

[15]  Nancy Staggers,et al.  Research Paper: Comparing Response Time, Errors, and Satisfaction Between Text-based and Graphical User Interfaces During Nursing Order Tasks , 2000, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[16]  D W Simborg,et al.  A highly automated hospital medication system. Five years' experience and evaluation. , 1975, Annals of internal medicine.

[17]  Robert S. Dittus,et al.  Deciphering the physician note , 2007, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[18]  Jonathan M. Teich,et al.  Research Paper: Implementation of Physician Order Entry: User Satisfaction and Self-Reported usage Patterns , 1996, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[19]  Christian Lovis,et al.  Power of expression in the electronic patient record: structured data or narrative text? , 2000, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[20]  J Labarère,et al.  Evaluation of prescription-writing quality in a French university hospital. , 1997, Clinical performance and quality health care.

[21]  Matthias Rauterberg,et al.  An empirical comparison of menu-selection (CUI) and desktop (GUI) computer programs carried out by beginners and experts , 1992 .

[22]  Thomas H. Payne The transition to automated practitioner order entry in a teaching hospital: the VA Puget Sound experience , 1999, AMIA.

[23]  Jonathan M. Teich,et al.  The impact of computerized physician order entry on medication error prevention. , 1999, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[24]  D Cristea,et al.  Combining menus with natural language processing in recording medical data. , 1988, Journal of clinical computing.

[25]  R T Brodell,et al.  Prescription errors. Legibility and drug name confusion. , 1997, Archives of family medicine.

[26]  E. Winslow,et al.  Legibility and completeness of physicians' handwritten medication orders. , 1997, Heart & lung : the journal of critical care.

[27]  Paul Wallace,et al.  Embedding guidelines into direct physician order entry: simple methods, powerful results , 1999, AMIA.

[28]  R. Nigel Horspool,et al.  Practical fast searching in strings , 1980, Softw. Pract. Exp..

[29]  D. Bates,et al.  Detecting alerts, notifying the physician, and offering action items: a comprehensive alerting system. , 1996, Proceedings : a conference of the American Medical Informatics Association. AMIA Fall Symposium.

[30]  C J McDonald,et al.  Medical students' and housestaff's opinions of computerized order‐writing , 1994, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[31]  Michael Weiner,et al.  Research Paper: Contrasting Views of Physicians and Nurses about an Inpatient Computer-based Provider Order-entry System , 1999, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[32]  Christian Lovis,et al.  Automatic Extraction of Linguistic Knowledge from an International Classification , 1998, MedInfo.